Latest / Beyond The Horizon / Murder In Moscow: The Idaho Supreme Court Upholds The Gag Order Ruling

Transcript

Murder In Moscow: The Idaho Supreme Court Upholds The Gag Order Ruling · Beyond The Horizon

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: Up everyone and welcome back to the program. So the
• 0:04
  Speaker 1: gag order in the Brian Koberger trial will remain. The
• 0:08
  Speaker 1: Idaho Supreme Court has weighed in and they have made
• 0:12
  Speaker 1: their decision. So let's dive into this article and let's
• 0:16
  Speaker 1: take a look at the decision to uphold the gag
• 0:19
  Speaker 1: order in the case of Brian Koberger. This article was
• 0:22
  Speaker 1: published by CBS News and this article was authored by
• 0:28
  Speaker 1: Kerry Breen. The Idaho Supreme Court on Monday rejected a
• 0:32
  Speaker 1: request by 30 news organizations to lift a gag order
• 0:36
  Speaker 1: in the criminal case of a man accused of stabbing
• 0:39
  Speaker 1: four University of Idaho students to death. The high court
• 0:44
  Speaker 1: did not weigh on whether the gag order, which prohibits attorneys, prosecutors,
• 0:49
  Speaker 1: law enforcement agencies, and others involved in the case from
• 0:52
  Speaker 1: talking to the news media, violates the First Amendment rights
• 0:56
  Speaker 1: of a free press. Instead, The unanimous Idaho Supreme Court
• 1:00
  Speaker 1: justices said the news organizations should have brought their request
• 1:04
  Speaker 1: to the magistrate judge who issued the gag order. And
• 1:07
  Speaker 1: this was the argument that was made by the state.
• 1:10
  Speaker 1: Remember when we were going over the arguments in the
• 1:13
  Speaker 1: court documents? This is why. Because this is the argument
• 1:16
  Speaker 1: that they were making about the gag order, saying that
• 1:19
  Speaker 1: it wasn't a First Amendment issue. It was an issue
• 1:22
  Speaker 1: that they didn't bring it to Judge Marshall first. They
• 1:25
  Speaker 1: tried to supersede Judge Marshall and go directly to the
• 1:28
  Speaker 1: Supreme Court. So the Supreme Court is saying, look, this
• 1:32
  Speaker 1: is not a First Amendment issue. As far as we're concerned,
• 1:35
  Speaker 1: this is more of a jurisdictional matter and the fact
• 1:38
  Speaker 1: that you didn't go through the proper channels. This court
• 1:42
  Speaker 1: has long respected the media's role in our constitutional republic
• 1:46
  Speaker 1: and honored the promises in both the Idaho Constitution and
• 1:50
  Speaker 1: First Amendment of the United States. Justice Gregory Moeller wrote
• 1:54
  Speaker 1: in the decision, going on to quote a ruling from
• 1:57
  Speaker 1: a federal case that said responsible press coverage guards against
• 2:01
  Speaker 1: the miscarriage of justice by subjecting the court system and
• 2:04
  Speaker 1: those who are part of it to public scrutiny. And
• 2:07
  Speaker 1: that's what I talk about all the time. That's why
• 2:10
  Speaker 1: I think it's so important for these kinds of matters
• 2:13
  Speaker 1: to be as transparent as possible. We have to be able,
• 2:17
  Speaker 1: as the public, to take a look at what's going on,
• 2:20
  Speaker 1: to evaluate what's going on, and to make sure things
• 2:22
  Speaker 1: aren't going south. Still, Mueller wrote, the balancing act between
• 2:27
  Speaker 1: the First Amendment protections afforded to the press and the
• 2:30
  Speaker 1: Sixth Amendment fair trial rights promised to the defendant has
• 2:34
  Speaker 1: become increasingly difficult with the advent of the Internet and
• 2:38
  Speaker 1: social media. He's not wrong about that. It's very difficult
• 2:42
  Speaker 1: these days to keep people sterile. People are going to
• 2:45
  Speaker 1: read the news and not only that, be inundated with
• 2:48
  Speaker 1: it on TV if it's a big story. And when
• 2:51
  Speaker 1: you're talking about something like the Brian Koberger trial or
• 2:55
  Speaker 1: the murders in Moscow, which captivated not only the country,
• 2:58
  Speaker 1: but the whole entire world, you know that there's a
• 3:01
  Speaker 1: ton of scrutiny on every bit of information that's coming
• 3:05
  Speaker 1: out of here. So it certainly is a balancing act.
• 3:08
  Speaker 1: And while I'm not a fan of it per se,
• 3:10
  Speaker 1: I do understand the necessity of having a gag order
• 3:13
  Speaker 1: in a case like this. Though those are well-guarded rights,
• 3:17
  Speaker 1: Moeller said, news organizations who wish to challenge gag orders
• 3:21
  Speaker 1: should start at the lower courts and work their way
• 3:23
  Speaker 1: up to the state's highest judicial bench, rather than approaching
• 3:27
  Speaker 1: the Supreme Court first. Loopholes and technicalities, folks. What do
• 3:32
  Speaker 1: I always talk about? And when you're dealing with the
• 3:35
  Speaker 1: judicial system, oh, it is rife with technicalities and loopholes.
• 3:39
  Speaker 1: And if you have the right lawyer and you have
• 3:41
  Speaker 1: enough dough, you're going to be able to utilize those
• 3:44
  Speaker 1: loopholes and those technicalities a lot better than most people.
• 3:50
  Speaker 1: Brian Koberger, 28, is charged with four counts of first-degree
• 3:53
  Speaker 1: murder and burglary in connection with the stabbing deaths in Moscow, Idaho.
• 3:58
  Speaker 1: prosecutors have yet to reveal if they intend to seek
• 4:01
  Speaker 1: the death penalty. The bodies of Madison Mogan, Kaylee Gonsalves,
• 4:06
  Speaker 1: Zanna Kernodle, and Ethan Chapin were found on November 13, 2022,
• 4:10
  Speaker 1: at a rental home across the street from the University
• 4:14
  Speaker 1: of Idaho campus. The slaying shocked the rural Idaho community
• 4:19
  Speaker 1: and neighboring Pullman, Washington, where Koberger was a graduate student
• 4:23
  Speaker 1: studying criminology at Washington State University. The case garnered widespread
• 4:29
  Speaker 1: publicity and in January, Latah County Magistrate Judge Megan Marshall
• 4:34
  Speaker 1: issued the sweeping gag order barring attorneys, law enforcement agencies,
• 4:39
  Speaker 1: and others associated with the case from talking or writing
• 4:43
  Speaker 1: about it. And I know a ton of you out
• 4:45
  Speaker 1: there are starved for information when it comes to this case.
• 4:48
  Speaker 1: And I wish I could say that I have some
• 4:50
  Speaker 1: kind of, you know, piped in source or something like that.
• 4:53
  Speaker 1: But unfortunately, we don't. All we have to go by
• 4:56
  Speaker 1: right now are the court filings, and thankfully, they have
• 5:00
  Speaker 1: given us a little bit of a window into what's
• 5:02
  Speaker 1: going on, but it hasn't given us that context that
• 5:06
  Speaker 1: we need to make heads or tails of what's really
• 5:08
  Speaker 1: going on. The Coalition of News Organizations, which includes the
• 5:13
  Speaker 1: Associated Press, contends the gag order violates the right to
• 5:16
  Speaker 1: free speech by prohibiting it from happening in the first place.
• 5:20
  Speaker 1: An attorney representing the family of one of the victims
• 5:24
  Speaker 1: has also filed an opposition to the gag order in
• 5:26
  Speaker 1: state court. Shannon Gray, who represents the Goncalves family, said
• 5:31
  Speaker 1: in that challenge that the gag order is unduly broad
• 5:34
  Speaker 1: and places an undue burden on the families. Marshall said
• 5:38
  Speaker 1: a hearing on the matter would be held after the
• 5:41
  Speaker 1: Idaho Supreme Court issues a ruling on the news organization's challenge.
• 5:46
  Speaker 1: So Shannon Gray and the Gonsalves family went to Judge Marshall.
• 5:50
  Speaker 1: So that's a pretty interesting move from them. And Judge
• 5:53
  Speaker 1: Marshall will now rule if the gag order is too
• 5:55
  Speaker 1: broad or not. And as we see here, that decision
• 5:59
  Speaker 1: was waiting on what happened with the gag order as
• 6:03
  Speaker 1: far as the media and their filing went. So now
• 6:06
  Speaker 1: that that ruling is in by the Supreme Court, I
• 6:09
  Speaker 1: would expect Judge Marshall to make a ruling here pretty quickly.
• 6:14
  Speaker 1: Kohlberger's attorneys, meanwhile, contend the gag order essentially requires the
• 6:18
  Speaker 1: attorneys involved in the case to act ethically to ensure
• 6:22
  Speaker 1: Kohlberger gets a fair trial. This is not a case
• 6:25
  Speaker 1: where the attorney seek to use the rules as a
• 6:27
  Speaker 1: weapon against one another. It is a clear case where
• 6:31
  Speaker 1: a young man is on trial for his life. Logsdon wrote,
• 6:35
  Speaker 1: there was nothing inappropriate about the magistrate court reminding the
• 6:38
  Speaker 1: attorneys involved of their ethical obligations. High publicity cases often
• 6:44
  Speaker 1: present a conundrum for judges who work to protect the
• 6:47
  Speaker 1: defendant's right to a fair trial. Courts sometimes feel that
• 6:52
  Speaker 1: controlling the flow of information around the case by forbidding
• 6:55
  Speaker 1: those involved from talking about it is an effective way
• 6:58
  Speaker 1: to limit publicity. But remember, the public has a right
• 7:02
  Speaker 1: to information as well, so it certainly is a balancing act.
• 7:05
  Speaker 1: And the good judges out there, they find a way
• 7:08
  Speaker 1: to navigate this correctly. And then you have other judges
• 7:11
  Speaker 1: who don't want to hear any of that. They slap
• 7:13
  Speaker 1: a gag order on something, and that's the end of it.
• 7:16
  Speaker 1: So we'll see which way Judge Marshall ends up going here,
• 7:19
  Speaker 1: but I'm guessing that this gag order is going to stand.
• 7:24
  Speaker 1: But gag orders can infringe on the First Amendment rights
• 7:26
  Speaker 1: of the public and of the people involved in the case.
• 7:30
  Speaker 1: News organizations that cover the courts serve a watchdog role,
• 7:34
  Speaker 1: keeping the public informed about how the judicial branch operates.
• 7:39
  Speaker 1: During the investigation into the University of Idaho student slayings,
• 7:43
  Speaker 1: news organizations' interviews with investigators and law enforcement officials often
• 7:48
  Speaker 1: worked to quash misinformation spread online by people who style
• 7:53
  Speaker 1: themselves as sleuths on social media sites. And there's no
• 7:57
  Speaker 1: doubt that when you're getting a good flow of information,
• 8:00
  Speaker 1: transparent information, from the actual source, meaning the court, then
• 8:06
  Speaker 1: that alleviates all of the bullshit when it comes to
• 8:09
  Speaker 1: conspiracies and the nonsense that everybody seems so concerned with.
• 8:13
  Speaker 1: If you want that to end, be more transparent. You
• 8:16
  Speaker 1: want more of it? Well, hide the proceedings. While we
• 8:20
  Speaker 1: are disappointed that the court denied the petition, the media
• 8:23
  Speaker 1: coalition now has a clear path under Idaho law to
• 8:27
  Speaker 1: challenge the gag order and vindicate these important First Amendment rights.
• 8:31
  Speaker 1: Wendy Olson, the attorney representing the news coalition, said the
• 8:35
  Speaker 1: Idaho Supreme Court ruling means the news coalition could now
• 8:39
  Speaker 1: go to the magistrate judge to ask her to reconsider
• 8:42
  Speaker 1: the gag order. The coalition has not yet announced any
• 8:46
  Speaker 1: next steps, so it's going to be interesting to see
• 8:48
  Speaker 1: what they do. And getting slapped down at the Supreme Court, well,
• 8:53
  Speaker 1: that's not the end of it, like it says here.
• 8:55
  Speaker 1: But are these media organizations going to pursue it any further?
• 8:59
  Speaker 1: That really becomes the question. And maybe they're going to
• 9:02
  Speaker 1: wait to see what happens with Shannon Gray and the
• 9:05
  Speaker 1: Gonsalves family and their challenge of the gag order in
• 9:09
  Speaker 1: front of Judge Marshall. Because if she doesn't strike it
• 9:12
  Speaker 1: down from them, then why would she strike it down
• 9:14
  Speaker 1: for the media, right? So maybe it's going to be
• 9:17
  Speaker 1: a game of cat and mouse now as the media
• 9:20
  Speaker 1: and their attorneys wait and see and try and get
• 9:23
  Speaker 1: a lay of the land before they decide their next move.
• 9:27
  Speaker 1: Because you know that they want this gag order removed.
• 9:29
  Speaker 1: They want to be able to have access to all
• 9:31
  Speaker 1: of the participants. That's what drives the clicks. That's what
• 9:35
  Speaker 1: sells newspapers. So that's what they want. And of course,
• 9:38
  Speaker 1: the media will say, well, we want access so that
• 9:41
  Speaker 1: we can inform the public. But their real motivation, we
• 9:43
  Speaker 1: all know, is to make a few bucks. And that's okay.
• 9:46
  Speaker 1: That's their job. But when there's a gag order like this,
• 9:49
  Speaker 1: it makes it very, very difficult to get any sort
• 9:53
  Speaker 1: of official information. And certainly nobody giving you any statements
• 9:57
  Speaker 1: on the record. And with the Supreme Court, upholding the
• 10:01
  Speaker 1: gag order here i would expect a whole lot more
• 10:04
  Speaker 1: of radio silence all right folks that's going to do
• 10:07
  Speaker 1: it for this one all of the information that goes
• 10:10
  Speaker 1: with the episode can be found in the description box